Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > You'll notice that it iterates once per char. Between that and the
> > strlen() call in Tom's version, not sure which is the lesser evil.
>
> Yeah, I was wondering that too. My code would require two scans of the
> source string (one inside strlen and one in memcpy), but in much of our
> usage the source and dest should be reasonably well aligned and one
> could expect memcpy to be using word rather than byte operations, so you
> might possibly make it back on the strength of fewer write cycles. And
> on the third hand, for short source strings none of this matters and
> the extra function call involved for strlen/memcpy probably dominates.
>
> I'm happy to just use the OpenBSD version as a src/port module.
> Any objections?
I found this URL about the function history of strlcpy():
http://www.gratisoft.us/todd/papers/strlcpy.html
I added the URL to port/strlcpy.c.
-- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +